Acceptability and adherence: findings from a Phase II study of a candidate vaginal microbicide, ‘Praneem polyherbal tablet’, in Pune, India
Abstract
Acceptability and adherence in clinical trials of microbicides may possibly predict their acceptance by the community. In this study, we investigated the acceptability and adherence of Praneem polyherbal tablet, a candidate microbicide, among 100 HIV-uninfected participants of a Phase II randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in Pune, India, conducted between June 2004 and February 2006 involving 6 months of coitally-dependent product use. The relationship between five acceptability domains and adherence to product use during the study period was explored. Acceptability and adherence were assessed among 95 study participants completing all study follow-ups. One hundred percent adherence (product use during each sex act for the study period) was reported by 67 participants (70.5%). The majority of participants reported acceptability towards all product characteristics. Product odour was reported to be a concern both in the placebo and Praneem arms. Participants from the Praneem arm [adjusted odds ratio (AOR)=3.8; 95% CI 1.4-10.8] and participants reporting lower acceptability for experience of product use during the sex act (AOR=4.2; 95% CI 1.0-17.3) were more likely to have partial adherence. In conclusion, the study product was acceptable to the majority of participants. However, barriers to adherence attributable to undesirable sexual experiences need to be addressed.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The overall acceptability of vaginally administered products has been reported to be very good among Indian women previously.
“The overall acceptability of vaginally administered products has been reported to be very good among Indian women previously [24] however we are not sure if the mailing of HPV self-sample kits will work in India due to the illiteracy and lack of awareness of this cervical cancer screening approach which has worked well in the developed countries [25].”
From Performance of HPV Self-Sample Collected by a Novel Kit in Comparison with Clinician Collected Sample for Cervical Cancer Screening (2024) · cites this paper as [24]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 14 · Cited by 18
- Authors
- Joglekar, N. S., Joshi, S. N., Deshpande, S. S., Parkhe, A. N., Katti, U. R., & Mehendale, S. M.
- Affiliations
- National AIDS Research Institute (IN)
- Venue
- Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2010-06
- Volume
- 104
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 412-415
- ISSN
- 0035-9203 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2043226806
- Cited by
- 18
- References
- 14
- Citations by year
- 2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 2.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Health and Contraception
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › HIV/AIDS drug development and treatment
- Keywords
- vaginal microbicides, acceptability, medication adherence, HIV prevention, polyherbal medicine, women's sexual health
- MeSH terms
- Administration, Intravaginal, Anti-Infective Agents, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, India, Male, Phytotherapy, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Plant Extracts, Quinine, Statistics as Topic, Vaginal Creams, Foams, and Jellies, HIV Infections
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review